We have received some information surrounding the sudden termination last summer of Detective Sergeant Daniel Reppucci after allegations flew about town. While nothing has ever been substantiated, a recent court ruling has left many who know him scratching their head.

In 2009, former Winchester Police Officer, Detective Sergeant Daniel Reppucci said he was being targeted by Winchester Chief of Police, Gary A. Phillips, for termination for reporting incidents of criminal and unethical behavior in the Winchester Police Department.

According to a Cheshire County Sheriff’s Report #09-63-OF, which we recently received a copy of and is available under the Right to Know laws to anyone requesting it; it names Daniel Reppucci as a participant and Chief Gary A. Phillips the reporting party. It also lists Stanley Plifka and Robert Gray as witnesses.

The Chief originally contacted Cheshire County Captain Croteau of the Sheriff’s Office to report the crime of an unauthorized entry into to his office. Captain Croteau later went to Sheriff Foote on Chief Phillips behalf to explain the circumstances.

This investigation is classed as a Misdemeanor, which would equate to charge of criminal trespass or some charge to that effect, if a person were to be found guilty.

According to the investigation, the Chief reported to the Sheriff’s office that he was concerned that not only was an unauthorized entry into his office a concern but also that a personnel related document was removed from his desk. This would add an additional charge of theft if a person were to be found guilty.

The Chief has testified and publicly maintained that Daniel Reppucci failed to obey an order while being questioned in this investigation while maintaining the investigation was an internal investigation and not expressly stating that in fact it was a criminal investigation.

As we analyze and compile all of the information given we will start disseminating the information on this blog, including the documents.

Following are 3 documents, the first 3 pages of the investigation by the Sheriff's Office that are called the "Incident Report" and that are a part of the criminal investigation conducted by the CC Sheriff’s Office for the crime reported by Chief Phillips.

Again, this investigation was obtained through the Right to Know Laws of NH and that fact alone makes it perfectly clear that the investigation being conducted by the Sheriff’s Office was indeed a criminal investigation and not an internal investigation as Phillips continues to try to maintain.

Had this been an “internal investigation” as Phillips has testified to it being, it would NOT have been released as it would be protected information under the Right to Know Laws of NH.

For the purpose of clarification, the fact that an ‘internal investigation’ is being or has been conducted is not confidential information that the public can not obtain, what is protected and confidential is the investigation itself. The investigation consisting of, allegations, charges, witness statements, reports, findings and punishment if applicable.

The incident report that is part of this investigation clearly discloses some of those elements, and are as follows,

So that it’s very clear, Phillips is the one who reported a crime to the CC Sheriff’s Office therefore he new that the ensuing investigation would be a “criminal investigation” and not an “internal investigation” as he has made statements to and has thus far allowed the courts to believe based on a recent ruling in Superior Court.

Based on this information it would also seem logical and clear that there could be no confusion or misunderstanding on Phillips part about the reporting of the crime such as who, what, where, when or why because it was he who contacted the CC Sheriff’s Office and made the complaint and asked for the investigation, not someone on his behalf.

Questions remain that still need answers and others likely will come to light as we analyze this information:

1. What was Phillips motive to not be honest about the type of investigation being conducted?

2. Who else has knowledge of this dishonesty and misleading information?

3. Is this not an integrity problem for Phillips if he chooses to contine to be dishonest and misleading about something so significantly important?

4. One has to begin to wonder if Reppucci’s allegation of being targeted isn't true after all.

6 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Huh - Phillips has been lying to everyone that it was an internal investigaiton that Repucci was not cooperating in and for a year all we have heard is that Repucci got fired because he wouldn't cooperate in an internal investigation which you're not allowed to refuse to cooperate in. Now a year later we find it was a criminal investigation? And it was Phillips who reported it to the Sheriff so he knew all along. So Phillips was trying to force Repucci to do something Repucci knew was illegal.This is starting to smell like a problem in the police dept. just like we have been hearing about.

So this says then that everyone knew it was an investigation of a crime including the one who reported it Phillips and the one who was conducting it(the investigation) that this says was Deputy Macie from the Sheriff's and also the one who approved the report Sgt. Michael Gorecki from the Sheriff's.And nobody thought that there was something wrong with that?That's a civil rights violation or constitutional rights violation because people have a right to talk to lawyers when they are being questioned by the police.Since nobody has said it was an internal investigation they were all trying to hide that this was a criminal investigation and not an internal investigation like they were saying it was.I think Phillips is hiding something and the rest were helping to do that.

Clearly a violation of a persons constitutional rights, in this case Reppucci. As Reppucci has always said it was criminal and not internal and he had a legal right to talk to a lawyer as anybody would. It's pretty easy to see here that Phillips blatantly and in broad daylight for all the world to see violated his constitutional rights. No doubt this is a criminal investigation that god knows who else may have been a part of. What was Macie and the Sheriff's Dept role in all of this?I certainly would have wanted to talk with a lawyer myself if I were in his position especailly if I was a whistleblower.

Word on the street today. One of the Winchester officer's is or did resign before he got fired for sexual harassment? The chief is short of help, and he is going for big raises this fall? According to local police the back up on rte10 tonight is legal?

Fact is: the AG’s office has already found Phillips, Roberts and Platz in violation of the laws and found based on allegations they “did not follow the law when changing the authorized names on the Associations bank account”.

If you aren’t following the law, then you Are breaking the law.

Fact is: Phillips and Roberts and Platz broke the law and the AG’s office let them get away with it with a slap.

Fact is: Phillips was very dishonest with the AG’s office about what was really going on in the police dept at the time and covered up some very important facts. Would the AG’s have found differently had Phillips told the truth?

Fact is: the AG’s office clearly wrote in their decision, “Gary A Phillips, Christopher Roberts and Maryan Platz will hereby agree to the following:”

“1. Chief Phillips will resign immediately as the Acting Treasurer”

“2. Christopher Roberts and Maryan Platz will immediately resign as officers of the Winchester Police Association”

Fact is: The AG’s office doesn’t reprimand or admonish people when they are not violating the law. It appears that the AG’s office has exposed more of the underhanded, devious, unethical and illegal behavior of Phillips and Roberts and this fact is very well documented through the right to laws and the entire investigation, letters and notes are available through the AG”s office.

Fact is: In July of 2009, when Phillips asked by Breau and Reppucci, President and Treasurer, to sign documents and checks related to the Police Association they both refused to do so without first reviewing the documents themselves. Phillips refused the request to allow either of them to review documents that Phillips and Roberts filled out. Breau and Reppucci were the only 2 Officials in the association who had the authority to sign the documents. Rather than let them review the documents Phillips and Roberts pretended to have a police association meeting and they voted themselves in as President and Treasure to take over the association.

Does that sound legal and ethical?

Phillips and Roberts have a track record of using their power as police officers to circumvent the laws and undermine the rules.

About Us

say: Police have an OBLIGATION to UPHOLD the LAW & NOT BREAK THE LAW.
As Concerned Citizens we want to bring TO THE PEOPLE the truth about what really goes on inside the Corrupt Winchester NH PD & the “ROGUE COPS” who work there.
***To show you what “ROGUE COPS” do to violate “YOUR” rights.
***To show you how these “ROGUE COPS” break the law & get away with it.
***To show you how these “ROGUE COPS” acts are repeatedly covered-up, including their criminal activity & how wide spread the conspiracy to cover-up really is.
***To show how because of these “ROGUE COPS” innocent people get hurt.
***To show the arrogance of these “ROGUE COPS”, how they believe they are above the law, how they believe they are untouchable & can do what they please.
***To show that if citizens don’t stand up together & “QUESTION AUTHORITY” then “Authority” runs the risk of becoming ‘CORRUPT, DECEPTIVE & VIOLATES PEOPLES RIGHTS & THE LAW” & you have “ROGUE COPS” .
***To try to stop “How someday somebody is going to get hurt because of these “ROGUE COPS” from having to be said.
Corruption in NH exists and it exists today.